1. science
2. medicine
3. surgery

RESEARCH ARTICLE
A Small Short-Necked Hupehsuchian from
the Lower Triassic of Hubei Province, China
Xiao-hong Chen1, Ryosuke Motani2*, Long Cheng1, Da-yong Jiang3, Olivier
Rieppel4
1. Wuhan Centre of China Geological Survey, Wuhan, Hubei 430023, P. R. China, 2. Department of Earth and
Planetary Sciences, University of California Davis, Davis, California 95616, United States of America, 3.
Laboratory of Orogenic Belt and Crustal Evolution, MOE, Department of Geology and Geological Museum,
Peking University, Yiheyuan Str. 5, Beijing 100871, P.R. China, 4. Center of Integrative Research, The Field
Museum, Chicago, Illinois 60605–2496, United States of America
*rmotani@ucdavis.edu
Abstract
OPEN ACCESS
Citation: Chen X-h, Motani R, Cheng L, Jiang D-y,
Rieppel O (2014) A Small Short-Necked
Hupehsuchian from the Lower Triassic of Hubei
Province, China. PLoS ONE 9(12): e115244.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244
Editor: Andrew A. Farke, Raymond M. Alf
Museum of Paleontology, United States of America
Received: September 9, 2014
Accepted: November 18, 2014
Published: December 17, 2014
Copyright: ß 2014 Chen et al. This is an openaccess article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author
and source are credited.
Data Availability: The authors confirm that all data
underlying the findings are fully available without
restriction. All relevant data are within the paper
and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This work was supported by the China
Geological Survey Project 1212010611603 to Xiaohong Chen, the China Geological Survey Projects
1212011120148 to Long Cheng, and the National
Natural Science Foundation of China Projects
40920124002 and 41372016 to Da-yong Jiang.
The funders had no role in study design, data
collection and analysis, decision to publish, or
preparation of the manuscript
Hupehsuchia is a group of enigmatic Triassic marine reptiles that is known
exclusively from two counties in Hubei Province, China. One of the common
features of the group was a modestly long neck with nine to ten cervical vertebrae.
We report a new species of Hupehsuchia, Eohupehsuchus brevicollis gen. et sp.
nov., which for the first time shows a short neck in this group, with six cervicals. The
configuration of the skull roof in Eohupehsuchus is also unique among
Hupehsuchia, with narrow frontals and posteriorly shifted parietals, warranting
recognition of a new species. The taxon superficially resembles Nanchangosaurus
in retaining hupehsuchian plesiomorphies, such as low neural spines and small
body size. However, its limbs are well-developed, unlike in Nanchangosaurus,
although the latter genus is marginally larger in body length. Thus, the individual is
unlikely to be immature. Also, Eohupehsuchus shares a suite of synapomorphies
with Hupehsuchus, including the second and third layers of dermal ossicles above
the dorsal neural spines. A phylogenetic analysis suggests that the new species is
not the most basal hupehsuchian despite its short neck, and instead forms the
sister taxon of Hupehsuchidae. Until recently, Hupehsuchia contained only two
monotypic genera. Now there are at least four genera among Hupehsuchia, and the
undescribed diversity is even higher. The left forelimb of the only specimen is
incomplete, ending with broken phalanges distally. The breakage could only have
occurred pre-burial. The individual may have been attacked by a predator and
escaped, given that scavenging is unlikely.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared
that no competing interests exist.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
1 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Introduction
The Mesozoic saw the emergence of multiple marine reptile groups including
Hupehsuchia, which is only known from the Spathian (Lower Triassic) of Hubei
Province, China [1]. Hupehsuchians have been known to science for more than
half a century since the discovery of Nanchangosaurus suni Wang, 1959 [2],
although the name Hupehsuchia was not coined until Hupehsuchus nanchangensis
was described by Young in 1972 [3]. Until recently, their anatomy and diversity
have been poorly understood despite the notable pioneering work by previous
authors [2–5]. Only two monotypic genera and a third unnamed genus
represented by an impression fossil (IVPP V4070, Institute of Vertebrate
Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Academia Sinica) [4] were known, and
none of the specimens were well-preserved. This left their affinities within
Diapsida ambiguous, although a close relationship with ichthyosaurs was
suspected [4, 6].
The level of knowledge has significantly improved recently. Ongoing fieldwork
by the Wuhan Centre of China Geological Survey (WGSC) has yielded new
hupehsuchian specimens from Nanzhang and Yuan’an Counties, Hubei Province,
China. So far, the specimens allowed us to improve knowledge of the anatomy of
the basal hupehsuchian Nanchangosaurus [7] and also to describe a new genus,
Parahupehsuchus, whose peculiar trunk contained a nearly complete tube of bones
[8]. In addition, the suggested phylogenetic affinities with ichthyosaurs [4] are
now strongly supported based on cladistic analyses [7].
Hupehsuchians typically have a heavily ossified body trunk with pachyostotic
ribs and gastralia that overlap adjacent elements, limiting its flexibility [8]. The
neural spines are bipartite across a large part of the trunk, and dermal ossicles are
present above the neural spines. The snout is dorso-ventrally flattened, elongated,
and edentulous. The peculiar combination of features have made the lifestyles of
Hupehsuchia ambiguous [4].
Despite such progress, our knowledge of Hupehsuchia is far from complete.
The present paper reports a new hupehsuchian discovered in the course of
fieldwork conducted by WGSC.
Materials and Methods
Specimen
The main specimen for the present study is WGSC (Wuhan Centre of Geological
Survey, China) V26003, representing a new species as described below. It was
collected during field excavation in 2011 in Yuan’an County, Hubei Province,
China. The specimen was excavated with the proper permit from the Bureau of
Land and Resources, China, and is accessioned in the fossil collection at the
central facility of WGSC in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
2 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Phylogenetic Analysis
We expanded a published data matrix [8] by adding the new species and 11 new
characters. Additionally, one of the original characters was recoded as two
separate characters (character 14 of [8] was divided into new characters 18 and
19), while five others were removed because they were found parsimony
informative although they might be useful in identifying the basal synapomorphies of Ichthyosauromorpha (characters 4, 5, 6, 7 and 22, of [8]). Cartorhynchus
replaced Utatsusaurus, reflecting the latest finding of this most basal ichthyopterygian [9]. As a result, the matrix now contains 32 discrete osteological
characters coded for three outgroup and five ingroup taxa. The data matrix and
descriptions of the characters are found in S1 Text.
We analyzed the resulting data matrix using PAUP* 4b10 (Phylogenetic
Analysis Using Parsimony) [10]. A branch and bound search, which ensures
discovery of all most parsimonious trees, was implemented given the small data
matrix. The result was confirmed by an ienum search in TNT 1.1 [11], which was
also used to calculate the Bremer index and bootstrap (n51000) values.
Measurements
Small structures below 170 mm were measured using Mitutoyo digital calipers
that displays the length down to 0.01 mm. Larger structures were measured using
a metal tape measure, and recorded to the nearest mm.
Nomenclatural Acts
The electronic edition of this article conforms to the requirements of the amended
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, and hence the new names
contained herein are available under that Code from the electronic edition of this
article. This published work and the nomenclatural acts it contains have been
registered in ZooBank, the online registration system for the ICZN. The ZooBank
LSIDs (Life Science Identifiers) can be resolved and the associated information
viewed through any standard web browser by appending the LSID to the prefix
‘‘http://zoobank.org/’’. The LSID for this publication is:
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1B8887A9-F513-427D-BE9A-DBBB15DD9A44. The
electronic edition of this work was published in a journal with an ISSN, and has
been archived and is available from the following digital repositories: PubMed
Central, LOCKSS.
Results
Systematic Paleontology
Systematic hierarchy.
Reptilia Laurenti 1768 [12]
Diapsida Osborn 1903 [13]
Hupehsuchia Young 1972 [3]
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
3 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Eohupehsuchus brevicollis gen. et sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:94F905DD8995-4477-841A-85DEDA8C8287
Etymology
Generic name combines eos (Gr. early, dawn), hupeh (alternative spelling of
Hubei Province), and Sou,xoz (Gr. name for the Egyptian crocodile deity Sobek).
Specific name is a combination of brevis (L. short) and collum (L. neck), referring
to the unusually short neck for a hupehsuchian.
Holotype
WGSC 26003 (Figs. 1–5).
Diagnosis
(Autapomorphies) Frontal not widened rostrally or caudally; parietal posteriorly
located, with rostral margin in level with rostral margin of upper temporal
fenestra; pineal foramen located posteriorly relative to the rostral margin of upper
temporal fenestra; neck short, with six cervical vertebrae; interclavicle with long
cranial process; third-layer dermal element short, at about one vertebral-segment
long; dermal armor elements very thin.
Locality and Horizon
Upper Spathian (Lower Triassic) Jialingjiang Formation, exposed in Yangping,
Yuan’an County, Hubei Province, China [14].
Description
Selected measurements of the holotype are given in Table 1. The preserved length
of the specimen is 23.6 cm, of which 17.4 cm is precaudal. The total length would
be about 40 cm, assuming the body proportion of Hupehsuchus. Therefore, this is
the smallest hupehsuchian known so far. Note, however, that Nanchangosaurus,
with precaudal lengths slightly greater than 20 cm [7], is similarly small. A large
part of the skeleton is re-crystallized and somewhat translucent under a strong
light. The specimen was found exposed on the surface and consequently suffered
from erosion to various extents. Parts of several bones, such as the premaxilla,
dentary, left radius and radiale, are missing because of erosion.
Cranium
The preserved skull length is 56.51 mm, without including the tips of the
premaxillae, which are missing because of erosion. The skull of Eohupehsuchus
(Fig. 2) closely resembles that of Nanchangosaurus and Hupehsuchus. The
edentulous premaxilla is long, extending over more than half of the total skull
length. The lateral exposure of maxilla is small, although the palatal extension of
the bone may be larger. The maxilla has a short post-narial process that ascends
from the main body to separate the lacrimal from the external naris. The nasal is
wide but not very long, not extending rostrally very much beyond the external
naris.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
4 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Fig. 1. The holotype of Eohupehsuchus brevicollis, WGSC V26003. Scales are in centimeters.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.g001
The orbit is 8.11 mm long, smaller than 10.84 mm in Nanchangosaurus (WGSC
V26006)—thus, Eohupehsuchus has a smaller relative eye size than
Nanchangosaurus. The margin of the orbit is defined by the lacrimal, prefrontal,
postfrontal, postorbital and jugal, without the frontal entering the dorsal margin
of the orbit, at least on the left side of the skull. However, this may be a
preservational artifact given the lateral exposure of the specimen, as discussed by
[7]. The lacrimal forms a band between the maxilla and prefrontal, which seems to
overlap the dorsal part of the lacrimal laterally. The prefrontal is thickened
posteriorly, near the base of a fan-shaped eyebrow that overhangs the rostro-
Fig. 2. Skull of Eohupehsuchus brevicollis, WGSC V26003. Scales are 1 cm long. Symbols: ar, articular; at, atlantal pleurocentrum; ax, axis centrum; bh,
basihyal (?); c#, centrum; f, frontal; i#, intercentrum; j, jugal; l, lacrimal; m, maxilla; n, nasal; n#, neural spines; p, parietal; pm, premaxilla; po, postorbital; prf,
prefrontal; ptf, postfrontal; q, quadrate; r#, rib; sq, squamosal, st, supratemporal. Colors: dark gray, unidentified bones; light gray, unidentified palatal bones;
medium gray, unidentified mandibular bones.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.g002
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
5 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Fig. 3. Pectoral and pelvic regions of Eohupehsuchus brevicollis, WGSC V26003. A, pectoral region. B, pelvic region. Symbols: Cl, clavicle; Co,
coracoid; F, femur; Fi, fibula; H, humerus; h#, hemal spine; Icl, interclavicle; Il, ilium; Is, ischium; n#, neural spine; Pb, pubis; r#, rib; Sc, scapula; v# vertebral
centrum. Colors: blue, vertebral centra; brown, neural spine first segment; green, neural spine second segment; light blue, rib; light green, limb elements;
light purple, hemal spines; light yellow, girdle elements; orange, gastral elements; pink, dermal armor second layer; red, dermal armor first layer; red-purple,
dermal armor third layer; yellow, parapophysis. Scale bars are 1 cm long.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.g003
dorsal corner of the orbit. Similar thickening is known in the type specimen of
Nanchangosaurus suni.
The cheek is open ventrally, with a narrow incision representing the lower
temporal fenestra. The relevant region of the specimen is slightly disarticulated.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
6 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Fig. 4. Mid-dorsal vertebrae of Eohupehsuchus brevicollis, WGSC V26003. Colors and symbols are the
same as in Fig. 3 except: light brown, diapophysis (dia); light yellow, swelling surrounding parapophysis; and
yellow, parapophysis (para). Scale bars are 1 cm long.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.g004
Fig. 5. Forelimbs of Eohupehsuchus brevicollis, WGSC V26003. Symbols: bb, broken bones that are kinked from damage; bp, broken bone pieces that
are dislocated; i, intermedium; i–v, metacarpal; H, humerus, R, radius; r, radiale; U, ulna; u, ulnare; 1–5, distal carpal. Scales are 1 cm long.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.g005
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
7 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Table 1. Selected measurements from WGSC 26003 in mm.
Preserved Length
236
Preserved Precaudal Length
174
Preserved Skull Length
56.51
Orbit Length
8.11
Orbit Height
5.41
Upper Temporal Fenestra Length
2.89
Retroarticular Process Length
4.26
Scapula Maximum Length
9.34
Scapula Proximal Width
6.22
Clavicle Length
12.42
Clavicle Maximum Width
2.19
Humerus Length
10.64
Humerus Proximal Width
6.07
Humerus Distal Width
6.92
Radius Length
10.38
Radius Proximal Width
2.84
Radius Distal Width
3.99
Ulna Length
10.19
Ulna Proximal Width
3.60
Ulna Distal Width
4.31
Last Dorsal Centrum Length
4.04
2nd Caudal Centrum Length
3.72
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.t001
The jugal is J-shaped without a quadratojugal process to close the lower temporal
fenestra ventrally. It has been broken into two pieces, probably because
compaction pushed the bone against the underlying hyoid body, which is thick
and robust. The caudal piece of the jugal is dislocated toward the quadrate,
causing the bone to disarticulate from the postorbital and narrowly touch the
squamosal. The dislocation also contributed to postmortem closure of the lower
temporal fenestra. The quadrate has also been displaced but toward the rostrum,
as is evident from its anterior location compared to its socket at the conjunction
between the squamosal and supratemporal. This dislocation, again, contributed to
the postmortem closure of the cheek. The quadratojugal is not preserved,
although it may have been present in life as in Nanchangosaurus and Hupehsuchus.
The frontal is approximately rectangular, with a forked but not widened rostral
end. This forking is in common with Nanchangosaurus and Hupehsuchus.
However, the overall shape of the frontal appears different from that seen in the
latter two genera, because a rostral and caudal widening of the bone, as well as a
tapering caudo-lateral process, is absent in Eohupehsuchus. The absence of the
process is related to the overall posterior location of the parietal, which overlies
the frontal with a medial rostral process in the two genera. A large pineal foramen
is enclosed by the two parietals, and the foramen is located within the anterior
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
8 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
halves of the bones. The rostral margin of the pineal foramen lies well posterior to
the rostral extent of the upper temporal fenestra in Eohupehsuchus, again because
of the posterior positioning of the parietal—the anterior extents of the two
temporal fenestrae are sub-equal or the pineal foramen is slightly more rostral
than the upper temporal fenestra in the other two genera. The upper temporal
fenestra, bordered by the parietal, squamosal, postorbital, and prefrontal, is small.
The squamosal excludes the supratemporal from the margin of the temporal
fenestra, as in Nanchangosaurus and Hupehsuchus—this strange arrangement
therefore seems common among hupehsuchians. The supratemporal forms a
‘lappet’ toward the occiput, as in other hupehsuchians.
Axial skeleton
The specimen preserves six cervical, 26 dorsal, at least one sacral, and at least 14
caudal vertebrae. The posterior limit of the cervical region was judged based on
rib morphology. The clavicle extends anteriorly to the level of the sixth cervical
centrum but the first rib that is clearly elongated is associated with the seventh
vertebra, which is identified as the first dorsal vertebra (Fig. 3A). The 33rd
vertebra was identified as a sacral based on its associated rib that is short, slightly
expanded distally, and closely associated with the ilium (Fig. 3B). The 34th
vertebra may also be sacral but its broken rib prevents us from judging its identity.
The dorsal count of Eohupehsuchus is similar to the counts of 26 to 27 in
Nanchangosaurus [7]. However, the cervical count is significantly different
between the two genera, with 10 cervicals in Nanchangosaurus versus six in
Eohupehsuchus. As a result, there are only 32 presacral vertebrae in Eohupehsuchus,
in contrast to 36 to 37 in Nanchangosaurus and 37 to 38 in Hupehsuchus [7]. Five
to six caudal vertebrae and a neural spine are preserved posteriorly in the main
string of vertebrae. In addition, a second string is dislocated postero-ventrally,
containing eight additional caudal vertebrae (Fig. 1). It is unknown how many are
missing in between the two strings of vertebrae.
The parapophysis is clearly present in posterior dorsal vertebrae (Fig. 4),
joining the diapophysis of the neural arch to form the synapophysis as in
Parahupehsuchus. However, the parapophysis lacks a second articular facets for
the peculiar rib articulation seen in the latter genus. The synapophysis is inclined
relative to the centrum, at about 30 ˚. The angle is shallow but not as much so as in
Parahupehsuchus. The synapophysis is not present in Hupehsuchus, and probably
not in Nanchangosaurus. The articulation between the parapophysis and
diapophysis is at about 45 ˚ to the horizontal plane of the centrum, i.e., the
diapophysis descends to the level of the parapophysis and articulates with the
caudo-dorsal side of the latter. The parapophysis forms a cranio-dorsal blob on
the centrum, which is distinctly swollen. Anterior dorsal vertebrae are largely
displaced, covered, or eroded, making it difficult to see the parapophysis.
However, the most craniad vertebra to clearly show the parapophysis is the eighth
dorsal vertebra, in which the centrum is dorsally exposed, revealing cranio-dorsal
swellings corresponding to the parapophysis. The first three dorsal vertebrae seem
to lack the parapophysis—therefore, the rib articulates solely with the diapophysis
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
9 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
in this region. A reversed transition occurs posteriorly. The second sacral neural
spine is the last in the series to have a diapophysis, whereas the first caudal lacks
the structure—therefore, the caudal ribs articulate only with the parapophysis.
The parapophysis exists in the first four caudal vertebrae but not on the fifth and
thereafter. Hemal spines appear at the fifth caudal vertebra—the first hemal spine
was damaged during preparation but its impression is still present between the
fourth and fifth caudal vertebrae.
Each dorsal rib bears a longitudinal groove, as in the condition in
Nanchangosaurus but unlike the condition in Hupehsuchus or Parahupehsuchus.
The erosion of the specimen is such that the proximal parts of the ribs are rarely
preserved. There is a rib that seems to articulate with the 26th vertebra, i.e., the
20th dorsal rib. The proximal head of the rib is complete and carries a small
posterior flange proximally (Fig. 4), as expected in hupehsuchians.
The neural arches show an approximately constant height throughout the
posterior cervical to the anteriormost caudal region. In contrast, the neural spines
change their height through the vertebral series, although none of them is very
tall. They are very low anteriorly, with neural arches taller than the corresponding
dorsal neural spine. The neural arch and spine become sub-equal in height in the
anterior dorsal region, near the eighth dorsal vertebra. More posteriorly, the
neural spines are taller than the arches, and the tallest neural spines are found near
the pelvic region, where they are about twice as tall as the neural arch. The second
segment of the neural spines first appear in the pectoral region, in the third dorsal
vertebra. From there, it exists throughout the dorsal series but disappears in the
sacral neural spines. Caudal neural spines are very poorly preserved, so it is
impossible to judge the presence of the second segment.
The first layer of dermal ossicles lies above the neural spines, one ossicle per
spine, as in other hupehsuchians. The first ossicle appears above the first dorsal
vertebra, although it is small and not fused to the neural arch. Where the second
segment of neural spine appears in the third dorsal vertebra, the ossicle starts to
fuse to this segment. The first layer ossicles persist into the anterior caudal series,
at least down to the seventh caudal vertebra.
A second and third layer of dermal ossicles occurs in Eohupehsuchus (Fig. 4)
unlike in Nanchangosaurus. The first second-layer element lies cranio-dorsal to
the ninth dorsal vertebra, whereas the first third-layer ossicle is found above the
tenth and eleventh dorsal vertebrae. As in Hupehsuchus and Parahupehsuchus, the
second-layer elements fill the gap between the first-layer elements, whereas the
third-layer ossicles are larger, spanning two to three vertebrae. The second-layer
elements never touch one another, unlike the first- or third-layer ossicles (Fig. 4).
The dermal ossicles are thin relative to their lengths, compared to those of
Hupehsuchus or Parahupehsuchus. Also, third-layer elements are short, for being
only about one vertebral-segment long. In Hupehsuchus and Parahupehsuchus, the
elements are as long as about 1.5 to 2 vertebral segments.
The gastralia comprise rows of three elements, two lateral and one median. All
three elements are boomerang-shaped, but the median one points caudally instead
of cranially as in lateral elements. Each lateral element partly overlaps its rostral
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
10 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
counterpart laterally, except the most cranial element. The overlap amounts to
about one third of the total width of the element. The median element is smaller
than the lateral ones and seems to fill the gap between the lateral elements,
without touching another median element. The three elements interlock tightly to
form an approximate S shape that is widely open. The interlocking is best
preserved caudal to the left ulna, where both right and left lateral elements are
exposed in ventral view, with the median element filling the gap between them.
The lateral element is approximately as long as three nearby dorsal vertebral
centra combined, which is similar to Parahupehsuchus and Hupehsuchus but not as
long as in Nanchangosaurus, in which it matches the length of four centra. There
are about two lateral elements per vertebral segment, although the ratio is not
constant. The lateral element is symmetrical as in Nanchangosaurus but unlike in
Hupehsuchus or Parahupehsuchus. The medial element is flattened as in
Nanchangosaurus, whereas Hupehsuchus and Parahupehsuchus have a thick and
narrow median element with round cross-section.
Appendicular skeleton
The coracoid of Eohupehsuchus is partly concealed by the humerus (Fig. 3A) but it
is obvious that the bone is distinctly smaller than the scapula, as is also the case in
Parahupehsuchus and Nanchangosaurus [7, 8]. The coracoid foramen exists as a
notch that is open proximally, craniad to the scapular facet, as in Parahupehsuchus
[8]. The scapula also resembles that of Parahupehsuchus in being fan-shaped—the
bone is incompletely known in Nanchangosaurus and Hupehsuchus. The clavicle
again resembles that of other hupehsuchians in having a prominent cranial
process that equals the scapular process in length. The clavicle, which is
approximately boomerang-shaped, has cranial and scapular processes that taper
quickly and lack flanges near the two ends. The interclavicle is damaged, but it was
approximately rhomboidal, with its cranial process much better developed than
the caudal counterpart (Fig. 3A).
The left forelimb shows a strange preservation, the interpretation of which will
be discussed later. The manus is incomplete distally (Fig. 5) but this is not because
of preparation error or weathering. At the time of discovery, the last phalanges to
be exposed for respective digits were at an angle with the bedding plane, appearing
as if they were descending into the matrix distally. After careful preparation of the
relevant region, however, it was revealed that the bones did not continue very far
into the matrix. Rather, they were abruptly terminated, with uneven broken
surfaces. The first phalanx of the fourth digit (phalanx iv-1) and the phalanx ii-2
are kinked around the damage mid-shaft (Fig. 5, bb). Phalanges iii-2 and v-1 are
broken and their pieces overlap (Fig. 5, bp); in the case of phalanx iii-2, the pieces
also overlap phalanx iii-3 that has shifted proximally. Phalanx iv-2 is incomplete
distally without a trace of bone splinters (Fig. 5). The breaks are approximately
aligned along a line that seems parallel the general direction of geological joints in
the rock, yet there is no displacement of matrix observed in this particular area.
Therefore, the breakage could only have occurred before the specimen was buried.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
11 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
The forelimb of Eohupehsuchus (Fig. 5) shares more features with that of
Hupehsuchus than that of Nanchangosaurus. The extremities of limb bones are
generally well developed, suggesting maturity despite of the small body size. The
stylopodial and zeugopodial bones are elongated, unlike the poorly developed
bones of Nanchangosaurus whose body size is slightly larger. The humerus has an
anterior flange that is slightly concave rostrally. The recrystallization of the left
radius shaft removed all surface striations. This, together with the damage along
the rostral margin of the bone, prevent confirmation of the presence of an anterior
flange on the bone, which is expected in hupehsuchians. The left radiale is
damaged, but the right one reveals a wide bone that is proximally straight and
distally rounded, a typical hupehsuchian feature. The radiale is the largest carpal
element. There are three proximal carpals, namely radiale, intermedium, and
ulnare, plus four distal carpals (dc). There is no dc 5, and the fifth metacarpal
(mc) articulated directly with the ulnare and dc4. Mc5 is distinctively more
slender than mc1-4. The phalangeal formula cannot be established because of the
aforementioned damage to the forelimb distally.
The left humerus is 10.64 mm long, which is at least 20% longer than in the two
known specimens of Nanchangosaurus. As mentioned earlier, these latter
specimens are slightly larger in body size, by about 12.5%. Therefore,
Eohupehsuchus has a relatively much larger forelimb compared to
Nanchangosaurus.
The pelvic girdle is not well-preserved, partly because of erosion (Fig. 3B). The
complete outline is not known for any of the three pelvic elements. The following
description is based on what is preserved and exposed, with interpretations. The
ilium is a straight bone that is about 2.5 times longer than wide. The proximal end
seems to have two facets, each of which is slightly wider than the ribs. Therefore, it
is expected that there are two sacral vertebrae. However, as noted earlier, poor
preservation prevents confirmation of the second sacral vertebra. The pubis is
plate-like, and the ischium is constricted in the middle. A better specimen is
needed to clarify the morphology of the pelvic girdle.
The hind limb is known only from the three proximal elements of the left limb.
The femur is much wider distally than proximally. The femoral head appears
slightly dislocated caudally relative to the center-line of the bone. The tibia is
wider proximally than distally. It is more slender than in Hupehsuchus or
Parahupehsuchus. The fibula, which is wider distally than proximally, is deflected
caudally beyond the posterior margin of the fibula, as in other hupehsuchians.
Phylogenetic Analysis
Branch and bound (called ienum in TNT) searches identified a single most
parsimonious tree in both PAUP* 4b10 and TNT 1.1 (TL542, CI50.762,
RI50.787). The small number is understandable given that there are only five
ingroup taxa (Fig. 6). Eohupehsuchus appeared as the sister taxon of
Hupehsuchidae, the clade comprising Hupehsuchus, Parahupehsuchus and IVPP
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
12 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
Fig. 6. Phylogenetic hypothesis of Hupehsuchia. Numbers are Bremer index/bootstrap values (1000
replications). See text for tree statistics.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.g006
V4070. Nanchangosaurus remained the most basal hupehsuchian, lying outside
the clade of Eohupehsuchus and Hupehsuchidae.
Discussion
It is firstly important to consider the possibility that the type and only specimen of
Eohupehsuchus brevicollis may represent a growth stage of another taxon. If it was
a growth stage of Nanchangosaurus suni, the body size would suggest it to be the
youngest individual known for the species since the specimen is smaller than the
two known specimens of N. suni. However, ossification of its limb is more
advanced than seen in the specimens of N. suni. For example, the humerus is
about 30 to 40% longer in Eohupehsuchus relative to body size than in
Nanchangosaurus. Moreover, it is unlikely that the cervical count changes from six
to ten through postembryonic growth—note that the dorsal counts are identical
between the two taxa. It is not known if the number of dermal ossicle layers
change through growth in Hupehsuchia; even if it does, it would be strange for
this smallest individual to have three layers whereas the two larger specimens have
only one each. Therefore, it is most likely that E. brevicollis is not a juvenile of N.
suni.
Eohupehsuchus brevicollis is also unlikely to be a juvenile of Hupehsuchus
nanchangensis, whose specimens are about twice as large. First, its cervical and
dorsal counts (6 and 26, respectively) both differ from those for H. nanchangensis
(9–10 and 28, respectively). These vertebral counts are not expected to increase
during postembryonic growth. Second, the surface of the left humerus in WGSC
V26003 appears to be well-finished, suggesting that the individual was mature.
Similarly, extremities of the autopodial elements are well-developed, and carpals
are well-packed, again indicating that the individual was osteologically mature.
Third, the fusion between the first and second segment of neural spines is at least
as progressed as in Hupehsuchus nanchangensis.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
13 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
The short neck of Eohupehsuchus is unusual among Hupehsuchia, whose
cervical count has so far been almost constant across taxa, with 9 to 10 vertebrae
[7]. We initially considered the possibility for the short neck being an artifact of
preservation. However, it is unlikely that the ribs have shifted along the vertebral
column, given their almost constant spacing and association with the
synapophysis in at least some vertebrae. Dermal shoulder elements may have been
shifted during deposition but that does not affect the identification of the first
dorsal vertebra, which is based on the rib morphology. Anteriorly, cervical
vertebrae form a curved yet continuous string, making it unlikely for any vertebra
to be dislocated. Thus, we accept the observed cervical count of six as an original
anatomical feature.
With the addition of Eohupehsuchus brevicollis, Hupehsuchia now contains four
monotypic genera. The number should in fact be five when counting the
unnamed genus that was recognized by [4] based on IVPP V4070, which is clearly
different from the four named genera, as the phylogenetic hypothesis witnesses
(Fig. 6). The presence of five monotypic genera within a limited geographic range
across about 80 km, only within the short time span of the latest Spathian, may
appear excessive. However, these five genera are morphologically distinctive from
each other, as demonstrated by the previous studies [4, 7, 8], as well as the present
investigation. We find it difficult to reject the observed diversity based on
morphological or phylogenetic reasons. Also, the five are divided into three size
classes, with Nanchangosaurus and Eohupehsuchus being the smallest (about 40 cm
in total length), Hupehsuchus and IVPP V4070 being intermediate at about 1 m,
and Parahupehsuchus being the largest, probably approaching 2.0 m based on
partial fossils. It is possible that body size differences helped them partition
resource use in the region. Further paleoenvironmental studies are necessary to
clarify this point.
The strange preservation of the left forelimb suggests that the tip of the limb
was lost before the burial of the animal, and that the loss resulted in damage
across the digits. Yet, this damaging mechanism only affected the tip of the left
forelimb alone without affecting the rest of the animal. There are not many
natural mechanisms that would cut off the tip of a paddle in this manner. The
possibility always exists that the tip was caught between two rocks that cut it but
such an accident is expected to be very rare, especially given that the
preservational environment does not indicate a rocky bottom. A more plausible
interpretation may be that the tip was bitten off by a vertebrate predator or
scavenger. Given that the rest of the body is undisturbed, it is unlikely that a
scavenger caused the damage. Also, no trace is present in the matrix surrounding
the specimen to indicate the presence of invertebrate scavengers, whereas no fossil
fish or an invertebrate scavenger is known from the Jialingjiang Formation. Then,
the most likely cause would be a predator, from which the individual escaped after
losing the tip of the left forelimb. If so, the bending and piling of broken
phalanges would have been caused by the pressure from the teeth of the predator,
which probably did not sharply cut off the tip in one bite. There is no evidence of
healing, so the individual may not have lived for too long after it escaped. Given
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
14 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
the small size of the injury, however, it is unlikely that the attack led to the
eventual death unless the bleeding did not stop.
There is a record of sauropterygians in the Nanzhang-Yuan’an fauna that
potentially fit the role of predator outlined in the scenario above. For example,
Hanosaurus hupehensis [15] is a large pachypleurosaur [16] that is at least twice as
large as Eohupehsuchus, unlike the other pachypleurosaur in the fauna,
Keichousaurus yuananensis [17]. The type specimen of H. hupehensis has a maxilla
that is 4.5 cm long, [15, 16]. The suspected injury in the present specimen is small,
spanning slightly more than 1 cm (Fig. 2). Therefore, H. hupehensis is sufficiently
large to have been able to cause the damage.
Predation pressure upon hupehsuchians was suggested previously based on
anecdotal inferences [8]. The present specimen may add a more direct piece of
evidence for the presence of predation pressure upon hupehsuchians, if the
interpretation above is true. Possibly, the high predation pressure led to the quick
diversification of hupehsuchians. However, it is difficult to test such a hypothesis.
Supporting Information
S1 Dataset. Phylogenetic data matrix in NEXUS format.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.s001 (NEX)
S1 Text. Phylogenetic data matrix and character descriptions.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244.s002 (DOCX)
Acknowledgments
We thank chief engineer Dequan Zhang from the Bureau of Land and Resources
of the Yuan’an County, Hubei Province for fieldwork assistance.
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: XC RM LC DJ OR. Performed the
experiments: RM. Analyzed the data: RM. Wrote the paper: RM OR DJ. Fossil
excavation: XC LC.
References
1. Motani R (2009) The evolution of marine reptiles. Evolution: Education and Outreach 2: 224–235.
2. Wang K-m (1959) Ueber eine neue fossile Reptiliform von Provinz Hupeh, China. Acta Palaeontologica
Sinica 7: 367–373.
3. Young C-C (1972) Hupehsuchus nanchangensis. In: Young C-C, Dong Z-M, editors. Aquatic reptiles
from the Triassic of China. Peking: Academia Sinica. pp.28–34.
4. Carroll RL, Dong Z (1991) Hupehsuchus, an enigmatic aquatic reptile from the Triassic of China, and
the problem of establishing relationships. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London
Series B-Biological Sciences 331: 131–153.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
15 / 16
Short-Necked Hupehsuchian
5. Wu XC, Li Z, Zhou BC, Dong ZM (2003) A polydactylous amniote from the Triassic period. Nature 426:
516–516.
6. McGowan C (1992) Unusual extensions of the neural spines in two ichthyosaurs from the Lower
Jurassic of Holzmaden. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 29: 380–383.
7. Chen X-h, Motani R, Cheng L, Jiang D-y, Rieppel O (2014) The enigmatic marine reptile
Nanchangosaurus from the Lower Triassic of Hubei, China and the phylogenetic affinity of
Hupehsuchia. PLoS One 9: e102361.
8. Chen X, Motani R, Cheng L, Jiang D, Rieppel O (2014) A carapace-like bony ’body tube’ in an Early
Triassic marine reptile and early onset of marine tetrapod predation. PLoS One 9: e94396.
9. Motani R, Jiang D-y, Chen G-b, Tintori A, Rieppel O, et al. in press) A transitional ichthyosauriform
with a short snout from the Lower Triassic of China. Nature.
10. Swofford DL (2003) PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (* and Other Methods). Version 4.
Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates.
11. Goloboff PS, Farris S, Nixon K (2000) TNT (Tree analysis using New Technology) ver. 1.1. Tucuma´n,
Argentina: Published by the Authors.
12. Laurenti JN (1768) Specimen Medicum, Exhibens Synopsin Reptilium Emendatam cum Experimentis
circa Venena. Viennae, Go¨ttingen: Typ. Joan. Thom. Nob de Trattnern. 214 p.
13. Osborn HF (1903) The reptilian subclasses Diapsida and Synapsida and the early history of the
Diaptosauria. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History 1: 449–519.
14. Li J, Liu J, Li C, Huang Z (2002) The horizon and age of the marine reptiles from Hubei Province, China.
Vertebrata Palasiatica 40: 241–244.
15. Young C-C (1972) A thalattosaur from Nanzhang, Hubei. In: Young C-C, Dong Z-M, editors. Aquatic
reptiles from the Triassic of China. Peking: Academia Sinica. pp.17–27.
16. Rieppel O (1998) The systematic status of Hanosaurus hupehensis (Reptilia, Sauropterygia) from the
Triassic of China. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 18: 545–557.
17. Young C-C (1965) On the new nothosaurs from Hupeh and Kweichou, China. Vertebrata PalAsiatica 9:
315–356.
PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115244 December 17, 2014
16 / 16